Can a lawyer use bold-face type for his listing in the classified or alphabetical section of a phone directory?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry asked whether an attorney's use of bold face type in business listings, in either the classified section or the alphabetical section of telephone directories, violates the Canons. The Committee was unanimous that it does (8-0).

The Committee held that the use of bold face type by attorneys in business listings in either the classified or alphabetical section of telephone directories violates the Canons, citing Canon 24. It noted the subject had previously been held to violate Canon 24 in Opinions 107 and 155, and cited ABA Opinion 284.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1958, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. It also predates Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), which loosened categorical advertising restrictions, though prohibitions on solicitation were not eliminated. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer make his phone-directory listing bold?

A: No. The Committee held unanimously that using bold face type in business listings, in either the classified or alphabetical section, violates Canon 24 (8-0).

Q: Does it matter which section of the directory?

A: No. The Committee applied the same conclusion to both the classified section and the alphabetical section.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 24 (advertising and solicitation), as applied to the typographical prominence of a directory listing. The modern analog is ABA Model Rule 7.2 (advertising).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.2 (advertising), as the modern analog
• Texas Canon 24 (former canon on advertising and solicitation)

Other opinions cited:

• Texas Opinions 107 and 155 (bold-face listings violate Canon 24)
• ABA Opinion 284

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 200: Out-of-City Yellow Pages Listing
• TX Ethics Op. 190: Out-of-State Lawyer's Texas Directory Listing
• TX Ethics Op. 192: Tax Lawyer's Newspaper Ad and Card

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-191/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_191.pdf

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

QUESTION PRESENTED

Does the use of bold face type business listings by an attorney in either the classified section or the alphabetical section of telephone directories constitute a violation of the Canons of Ethics?

18 Baylor L. Rev. 284 (1966)

SOLICITATION - CLASSIFIED ADVERTISEMENT - TELEPHONE DIRECTORY
It is improper for an attorney to use bold face type in business listings in either the classified section or alphabetical section of telephone directories.

Canon 24.

It is the unanimous opinion of the committee that the use of bold face type by attorneys in business listings in either the classified section or the alphabetical section of the telephone directories constitutes a violation of the Canons of Ethics. (See Canon 24.)

The subject of this inquiry has been previously held by this committee to constitute such violation of Canon 24 in its Opinion No. 107 and No. 155. (See also ABA Opinion No. 284.) (8- 0.)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 191 (1958)